The Republican Thread

[Cknolls]

Senator Joe Biden,speaking at a campaign event in Maumee, Ohio, yesterday: "I used to be a councilman. I left that for this job - for the Senate - you know why? Your job is harder.

 

 

Keeps giving and giving and giving.

[Balta1701]

Senator Joe Biden,speaking at a campaign event in Maumee, Ohio, yesterday: "I used to be a councilman. I left that for this job - for the Senate - you know why? Your job is harder.

 

 

Keeps giving and giving and giving.

Seriously, that qualifies as a gaffe in your book?

[EvilMonkey]

They have faced prosecution before and have been convicted. Ironically, they were sentenced to community service in at least once case.

 

From wiki:

But with their almost systematic abuse of the voter registration, someone higher up should be the one getting in trouble, and they should not be getting government contracts until they can show some kind of verifiable changes to their systems to prevent further fraud.

[Balta1701]

But with their almost systematic abuse of the voter registration, someone higher up should be the one getting in trouble, and they should not be getting government contracts until they can show some kind of verifiable changes to their systems to prevent further fraud.

A serious question. Are there other companies that do the same level of voter registration work that we could compare their performance with? I can tell you from experience that ACORN is not the only group that ever has trouble with people filling out or inventing voter applications to meet their goals. At IU when I was an undergrad the student government at the time launched a voter registration drive that brought in an enormous number of applications, a lot of which had either wrong data or were just illegible. I believe I was one of only 2 students who voted at my dorm that year.

 

Any time you put together a drive to gain thousands, tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands of new voter apps, some of them are just going to be crap. That's why there are organizations that have the job of checking those applications to see if the data is reasonable, and why there is such a thing as a provisional ballot if there's any question.

 

So my question to you is...yes, you're going after this company for its performance. Can you offer up some comparison to prove that they're consistently worse than other groups or companies attempting the same work at the same scale?

[NorthSideSox72]

But with their almost systematic abuse of the voter registration, someone higher up should be the one getting in trouble, and they should not be getting government contracts until they can show some kind of verifiable changes to their systems to prevent further fraud.

I think a very similar stance should be taken with Diebold and their voting machines.

 

[EvilMonkey]

I think a very similar stance should be taken with Diebold and their voting machines.

If they don't work, then they should get new ones that do. I have no problem with that.

[DrunkBomber]

I havent seen this mentioned on here yet. I know this snip it is from a commentator and not a journalist so its biased, but does anyone have anymore insight into Obamas Global Poverty Act? I heard about it on the radio and havent found much on it that isnt one sided. Anyone know whats up?

 

Congress is proposing, in Barack Obama's Global Poverty Act (S.2433, based on H.R. 1302, passed by the House September 25, 2007), that Americans be delivered into a state of indentured servitude as laborers for the United Nations. Perhaps "indentured servitude" is too kind a term, for as horrendous a condition as it is, there is usually a time limit to such servitude. Slavery would be the more accurate term in this instance, for what Congress is considering is servitude by Americans in perpetuity, in exchange for nothing but the privilege of laboring to "save" the world without thanks or reward, of filling the alleged needs of others, of performing unlimited "community service" for the offense of merely existing.

Edited September 19, 2008 by DrunkBomber

[EvilMonkey]

[Controlled Chaos]

Glenn Beck: Strong case against Obama

Audio Available:

 

September 17, 2008 - 13:10 ET

 

The Case Against Barack Obama

 

GLENN: We have David Freddoso on. He is the author of a book, The Case Against Barack Obama: The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media's Favorite Candidate. He is a reporter for the National Review Online. WGN in Chicago getting heat for having him on. The Obama campaign does not want this man on. There's another guest that they had on that they also went through the roof and just did everything they could to scare WGN into not having these guests on. Why? What is it that the Obama campaign doesn't want? They say smears. David Freddoso is somebody that, believe me, I have had on my program and on my program, to get it on CNN, it better be right. If you're a conservative, it better be right. David Freddoso is somebody that we have checked out ourselves to make sure what he's saying is right, and let's go to the abortion thing. I played the ad. It's a 527 now against Barack Obama that says please, Barack Obama, please don't allow babies to die from botched abortions. That's a pretty outrageous claim.

 

David, where does that claim come from? What is this story?

 

FREDDOSO: Well, this is the story of the Born Alive Infants Protection Act and it goes back to a hospital in the southwest suburbs of Chicago called Christ Hospital where they were performing on a regular basis induced labor abortions and these are late second, early third trimester abortions in which the drugs are given to the mother to induce violent labor and the baby is usually killed in the contractions and comes out. But about 15 to 20% of the time this produces a live baby is born, I should say. And sometimes the babies will live just for a few minutes, sometimes for several hours. But this hospital was not giving any thought to medical treatment for them when they survived and could have potentially lived on and saved in incubator under whatever sort of medical technology we have to keep premature babies alive. They were simply shelving them and

 

GLENN: Hang on just a second. I just, I don't care how you feel about abortion. If you think abortion is a right, you know, a woman's right to choose, et cetera, et cetera, fine. I disagree with you. We're going now to a step of partial birth abortion. Now people are not for partial birth abortion. The vast majority of people. They are pro choice but they are saying you can't take the baby and have them birthed all the way except for the head and then suck the brains out while the head is still in the mother. That is a that is a step way beyond. And Republicans and Democrats agree on that. This is something further than that. This is a baby that survives an abortion and is living outside of the mother, is now just neglected and dies from neglect. Right or wrong, David?

 

FREDDOSO: That is exactly what was happening and, in fact, that fact isn't even in dispute. What is in dispute is exactly what condition that they were being left to die in. According to the nurse, Jill Stanek whom I interviewed for the kids against Barack Obama, they were one of the places they would put these babies to die while they were struggling is the utility closet where medical waste goes. According to the hospital they were putting them into comfort rooms where they would just simply leave them to die with a blanket or something. So that was the practice. And the attorney general of Illinois told Jill Stanek, this nurse, that this was not violating the law, that they couldn't do anything about it and, you know, all protestations to the contrary, there wasn't any law protecting these babies because the attorney general of Illinois wasn't you know, he absolutely said, you know, no, you would need a new law if you wanted to do this.

 

GLENN: David, why couldn't you, why couldn't the doctor just kill the baby once the baby was born?

 

FREDDOSO: Well, I mean, I would say that's murder. I mean, I'm also pro life.

 

GLENN: Got it. No, I'm not talking about your opinion. I'm talking about the law. It would indeed be murder if they would have killed the baby once the baby was born.

 

FREDDOSO: Well, of course, and even this practice itself strikes me as murder because you don't actually have to stab someone through the heart to commit murder.

 

GLENN: I understand that.

 

FREDDOSO: You can certainly leave them, there's such a thing as negligent homicide as well. But in any case, there wasn't a law protecting them and that was what they went to the Illinois legislature to do was to pass a law that would define anyone who is already born and alive as a person. And that would have made the laws of the State of Illinois apply to these premature babies.

 

GLENN: How did Barack Obama stop it?

 

FREDDOSO: Barack Obama was the only state senator to speak against this law and

 

GLENN: Sorry. Repeat that, please.

 

FREDDOSO: He was the only state senator to speak against this law on the floor of the Illinois Senate.

 

GLENN: Okay.

 

FREDDOSO: In all the times it came up, in fact, he was the only one to speak against it. And his speech that he gave is very interesting, and I've given it in full in Chapter 10 of The Case Against Barack Obama because the argument is basically this, that if we go and recognize premature babies born alive in what some people call a previable condition, although they were clearly living for a while, if we do this, then it might down the road affect the right to abortion. It might cause it might create some kind of

 

GLENN: Slippery slope that they always say doesn't exist.

 

FREDDOSO: I'm sorry?

 

GLENN: A slippery slope that liberals always say doesn't exist.

 

FREDDOSO: Exactly.

 

GLENN: He was using that argument.

 

FREDDOSO: And that was his argument was essentially a slippery slope argument. His argument on the floor, it had a few contradictions in it, didn't quite make sense. I mean, he used the word "Fetus" to describe a premature baby for a moment and then corrected himself.

 

GLENN: All right.

 

FREDDOSO: But, you know, by his argument you could also say that a premature baby who wasn't born in an abortion, who was just simply born premature. I have a friend who recently gave birth to a premature baby and by his argument you would have to question or deny their personhood as well, as though they are somehow less persons than babies carried nine months.

 

GLENN: So the first time did he sign the bill?

 

FREDDOSO: The first time he voted present on the bill, which is in the Illinois legislature is equivalent to no. And it was part of a strategy that he had devised with Planned Parenthood lobbyists.

 

GLENN: Stand by. Stand by. We're going to come get the rest of the story in just a second.

 

(OUT 11:42)

 

GLENN: I can tell you why Barack Obama did not want David Freddoso on WGN, because these are the most powerful arguments I have ever heard against Barack Obama. Well stated, well documented and so unbelievably damning. David, we are quickly running out of time. May I invite you for another hour tomorrow?

 

FREDDOSO: I would love to do it again tomorrow, absolutely.

 

GLENN: Okay. So let's finish the abortion story, please.

 

FREDDOSO: Yes. Senator Obama voted he voted present on that bill. It was part of a strategy that he devised, that he and some Planned Parenthood lobbyists had devised that basically everyone would vote present instead of voting no. And just so you know, it came up the following year; he did it again. The bill, by the way, it passed the state senate and died in the state house committee. In 2003, though, Democrats had taken over the state senate and Obama was now the chairman of the Senate health committee. And as chairman he presided and this is the reason that he has ever since said he voted against this bill in committee because it didn't contain the same language that the federal Born Alive Infants Protection Act contained. Sort of redundant protection against this law ever effecting the right to abortion. What he was misleading people about is that, in fact, in 2003 the bill that he voted against in his committee did contain that language, was exactly the same as the bill that had gone to the U.S. Senate floor, that Barbara Boxer had stood up and said, "I support this bill, everyone should vote for this bill." Obama voted against it and that puts him on the very fringes when it comes to issues of human life at its very beginning.

 

GLENN: So wait a minute. Barbara Boxer was on the other side of this issue?

 

FREDDOSO: Yes, that's right. Hillary Clinton was also on the other side. The vote was 98 0 and the two guys who weren't there to vote were pro life Republicans. So basically every abortion proponent in the United States Senate is more protective of human life in its early stages than Senator Obama.

 

GLENN: Say that again, please.

 

FREDDOSO: Every single abortion proponent in the United States Senate at the time they voted on this the roll call vote was in 2001 every single one is more protective of human life in its early stages and more respectful of human life in its early stages than is Senator Obama based on his voting record.

 

GLENN: Now, Barack Obama will say, no, that's not true, I wasn't I was of course for this. He seems to have an ever evolving but he does believe in evolution an ever evolving story on this.

 

FREDDOSO: Yes. Because at first his story for the next three years or actually four years was that it didn't contain the language if it had just contained the federal bill language, then he would have voted for it. In fact, it did contain that language and he voted against it. This year when National Right to Life found the records this is just a few weeks ago, found the records of the committee hearing and they found the bill was exactly the same and Obama voted against it in a party line vote in his committee, he changed his explanation to say now the thing was there was already a law protecting these babies. And there is an old abortion statute on the books in Illinois and it's a bill that Obama has repeatedly argued that every element of it is unconstitutional. It was enjoined from in most of its aspects it was enjoined from enforcement precisely because of the Roe versus Wade decision. And the decision they clinged it to last as each part of it is being knocked down is a provision that would require a second doctor to be present when such an abortion is performed in order to save the baby that the first doctor is trying to kill. And that's something Obama has specifically argued is unconstitutional because it creates an undue burden on the woman and so that is basically, Senator Obama is grasping at straws when it comes to the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. He's making arguments now that don't make sense and arguments, by the way, that he was never making at the time when he voted against it.

 

GLENN: I would just like to point out to anybody who doesn't understand the rhetoric of politicians, I'm a recovering alcoholic. So I speak bullcrap for most of my life. So I speak it fluently. I can translate political speak into English. When anybody says that they are worried about that they want the condition of the mother's health, let's make sure that we have an exception for the mother's health, there has never once been a case where a doctor says, in the case of let's say partial birth abortion or where they are performing the abortion late term and they would birth the child, that it is better for the mother if they kill the baby. What they're talking about, there have been cases on mental health, yet her mental health matters if she has the baby, but they deny any kind of mental health stress if she has had the abortion. It doesn't make any sense. It is a game that they play. You cannot tell me that mainstream America you know, I'm not even going to say that. You cannot tell me that 98% of America, pro choice, pro life believe that we should leave a baby to die through neglect. There is no way to make the mental hurdles in your own head to say that this child should die from neglect, this fetus should die from neglect. There is no person within the sound of my voice of 98% of the population of this country that thinks that that is reasonable. This is the kind of guy that you have to understand you're dealing with. He's not somebody who's kind of on the left. He's not somebody who's kind of out of pace with the mainstream. This guy is as far left as you can get and this is just one example.

 

David, on tomorrow's program can you give us more examples of how incredibly out of step with the mainstream he is?

 

FREDDOSO: Oh, absolutely. Just about every issue you can find Obama taking stands during his career that are, you know, whether it's guns, babies, taxes and national security as well, stances that members of his own party think are completely wrong. He is the most liberal senator in the United States Senate for a reason, and I'm not the one saying it. That's National Journal, which is a highly respected $2,000 a year publication here in Washington.

 

GLENN: Tomorrow, I would like to go a little bit into and I don't even know if you did this, David, but his mom, he always is saying "My mom from Kansas, my mom from Kansas, my mom." It's like I see Auntie Em every time he says "My mom from Kansas." His mom from Kansas was leftist as well. He's not coming from a background of people that are Auntie Em and, oh, quick, get into the root cellar. There is the roots of Barack Obama are from the left. Tomorrow can you go into a little bit of "Show me your friends and I'll show you your future" and just give me the absolutely best well documented cases that this guy's judgment on friends, if you take him at his word that, "Well, these guys aren't the people we know; well, I can't really answer for my friends or my family or whatever," that his judgment is off.

 

FREDDOSO: Oh, absolutely.

 

GLENN: And I don't believe it's his judgment. I believe he is choosing to surround himself with these people.

 

FREDDOSO: Well, right. And that's just the thing. You know, I have spoken with many people about this question of guilt by association. This isn't about guilt by association. This is about looking at the actual choices that Barack Obama has made in his life. And that's the best sort of gauge we can have. And if you give it the most charitable interpretation and we look at some of these relationships and that's the only conclusion you can come to is that his judgment in picking friends is rather suspect.

 

GLENN: Name of the book is The Case Against Barack Obama: The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media's Favorite Candidate . The author is David Freddoso. He will join us again tomorrow and all of this will be available online at GlennBeck.com soon.

 

[clyons]

FREDDOSO: The first time he voted present on the bill, which is in the Illinois legislature is equivalent to no. And it was part of a strategy that he had devised with Planned Parenthood lobbyists.

 

 

I stopped reading here. That is incorrect.

Edited September 19, 2008 by PlaySumFnJurny

[EvilMonkey]

An abortion survivor raps Obama on the above mentioned bill.

[Steve9347]

An abortion survivor raps Obama on the above mentioned bill.

An "abortion survivor"...

 

That's hilarious.

[Cknolls]

An "abortion survivor"...

 

That's hilarious.

 

 

Do explain

 

[Texsox]

Do explain

Technically isn't everyone walking the planet an abortion survivor?

[Steve9347]

Do explain

Calling themselves a survivor is a slap in the face to anyone who has ever had to survive anything. There's a reason abortions are legal, and had said person not "survived" the abortion they'd have never even had a brain developed to even know what was happening... it's not surviving, it's blind luck, which is pretty much the reason most of us are here. If they are an abortion survivor, then EVERYONE ON THE PLANET is an abortion survivor.

 

I found that title to be hilariously terrible.

Edited September 19, 2008 by Steve9347

[ChiSox_Sonix]

Calling themselves a survivor is a slap in the face to anyone who has ever had to survive anything. There's a reason abortions are legal, and had said person not "survived" the abortion they'd have never even had a brain developed to even know what was happening... it's not surviving, it's blind luck, which is pretty much the reason most of us are here. If they are an abortion survivor, then EVERYONE ON THE PLANET is an abortion survivor.

 

I found that title to be hilariously terrible.

 

 

On that line of thinking, wouldnt that woman who survived a gun shot to the back of the head execution style a month ago in florida just be a victim of dumb luck then? You can point to "dumb luck" as a reason why many people survive whatever it is they may have. Just sayin.

[EvilMonkey]

"But is it saves even one life, isn't it worth it?"

[Cknolls]

A number of journalists are trying hard to fit McCain's "Advice" ad into the now-established theme of the McCain campaign employing lies and underhanded tactics. The Obama campaign says the ad is a lie. Writers at Time and the Atlantic have suggested that it has racist overtones, because Franklin Raines is black, and Obama is black, and a photo depicting a generic victim of their alleged financial wrongheadedness is of a white woman.

 

Now, the Washington Post fact checker takes McCain to task for relying on…the Washington Post. Yes, the paper reported in July that Raines had "taken calls from Barack Obama's presidential campaign seeking his advice on mortgage and housing policy matters," and in August called Raines a "member of Mr. Obama's political circle." But hey, the Post says now, that information originally came from the Style section, and it came when a Post reporter was "chatting" with Raines at a photo shoot. Raines apparently said he had gotten, in the reporter's words, "a couple" of calls from the Obama campaign. When the reporter asked what about, Raines said, "Oh, general housing, economy issues." So the reporter wrote that Raines had "taken calls from Barack Obama's presidential campaign seeking his advice on mortgage and housing policy matters."

 

So now, the Post says McCain "is clearly exaggerating wildly in attempting to depict Franklin Raines as a close adviser to Obama on 'housing and mortgage policy.'"

 

But the McCain commercial never called Raines a "close adviser" or a close anything. As far as "housing and mortgage policy," given that the Post had written — and has not retracted — that Raines had discussed "mortgage and housing policy" matters with the Obama campaign, in what sense is that a wild exaggeration?

 

Oh, and by the way, just for good measure, the Post brings up the racial issue, too — noting without any other comment that the McCain ad "attempts to link Obama to Franklin Raines, the former CEO of the bankrupt mortgage giant, Fannie Mae, who also happens to be African-American. It then shows a photograph of an elderly white woman taxpayer who has supposedly been 'stuck with the bill' as a result of the 'extensive financial fraud' at Fannie Mae."

 

 

P.S. And now, of course, the Obama campaign is sending out emails quoting the Washington Post charge that McCain is "exaggerating wildly."

 

P.P.S. A reader reminds me that I should have double-fact-checked the fact-checker. The original Post profile of Raines apparently ran in the paper's Business section, not Style, as the fact-checker said.

 

 

 

[Cknolls]

From last night's Countdown:

 

OLBERMANN: Speaking of Obama and advisors, there's another aspect of the McCain plan today. McCain has a new ad out claiming Obama has an economic advisor named Frank Raines. And that under Frank Raines' leadership, Fannie Mae committed extensive fraud, and it collapsed, and Frank Raines made millions. The problem being that the Obama campaign has said tonight, "Frank Raines has never advised Senator Obama about anything ever," that's the quote, and Frank Raines said, "I am not an advisor to Barack Obama nor have I provided his campaign with advice on housing or economic matter." What on earth happened there?

 

FINEMAN: Well, what happened is-not much. Based on what I've been

 

told, Frank Raines did pay a visit to Barack Obama's Senate office a couple

 

I'm not sure exactly when but really before the campaign geared up big time, is my understanding and he didn't meet with Obama.

 

Frankly, Frank Raines is a kind of radioactive character around here because he was heavily criticized by independent investigators who looked at what happened to Fannie Mae. And you know, he's not the prince of Fannie Mae that you want to necessarily be in a photo-op with.

 

So, Obama's a pretty shrewd politician. I think Raines has probably given some contributions both to the Senate race and maybe the presidential one. But he's not counted in the inner circle. This came about because of a "Washington Post" story but the Obama people are telling me is that it was Raines himself who, at the time, identified him that way. Now, he's got this statement out tonight.

 

But I know the campaign well enough to know that Raines has never been in the inner circle of the Obama campaign.

 

So, Raines is an adviser to Team Obama, just not in the inner circle.

 

 

 

Hey MSNBC, we need more cover for Barry.

[bmags]

DAMN THEM FOR TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE TRUTH

[Cknolls]

DAMN THEM FOR TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE TRUTH

 

 

Which is what? That he was an advisor. Damn the MSDNC for trying to cover for Barry ,AGAIN.

[Cknolls]

DAMN THEM FOR TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE TRUTH

 

 

So the WAPO was wrong in its reporting? Where's the correction?

[bmags]

Journalism isn't writing an encyclopedia. People are writing about things as they are happening and don't have the luxury of looking back at all the events to seeing the whole picture. So you are mad that MSNBC found out that Raines was an advisor, yea? They had two statements, one from the McCain campaign saying raines had large influence on Obama's economic policy, then one from Obama saying he has never been an advisor. And then they end on that Raines was an advisor. And you are mad about that? Why? Because they didn't take the GOP version, which you assume is the truth?

[EvilMonkey]

Racism Week for the Democratic Party Continues:

 

So far, we've had:

 

Tuesday:

 

Kathleen Sebelius.

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics/A...ory/689044.html

 

and

 

Jack Cafferty.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-todd-h...ma-youre-racist

 

 

Wednesday:

 

Rush Limbaugh Ad.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178554189155003.html

 

 

Today:

 

NYT on Raines ad.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelst...ng-race-card-ad

 

and

 

Ohio Obama Surrogates Say Not Voting For Obama= Racist.

http://www.wytv.com/news/local/28423644.html

 

 

Hmmm... ya think it's a coordinated attack? naaaa... couldn't be. I mean we're talking about the post-partisan, post-racial, Messiah, right? It not like he or his surrogates ever played the race card...much... errr.. nevermind.

Yeah, I am the one posting it HERE, but it isn't Republicans or conservatives bringing it up out in the MSM.

 

[mr_genius]

Which is what? That he was an advisor. Damn the MSDNC for trying to cover for Barry ,AGAIN.

 

Hey wait a minute....

 

slow down there, Keith Olbermann is a completely unbiased journalist doing his job. How dare you question him.